If  none  re- 
sponds to  your 
call,  follow  the 
path  all  alone, 
all  alone  .... 

If  again  in  the 
stormy  night  you 
do  not  find  a 
single  soul  to 
hold  the  light  for 
you,  and  they  all 
close  the  doors 
against  you,  be 
not  faint-heart- 
ed, forlorn  pa- 
triot, but  take  a 
rib  out  of  your 
side,  and  light  it 
with  the  fire  of 
lightning  and 
then,  follow  the 
Gleam,  follow 
the  Gleam. 

— Tagore. 


April , 1919 

»91i 


INDIA'S  FREEDOM 

IN 

AMERICAN  COURTS 


FRIENDS  OF  FREEDOM  FOR  INDIA 
92  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York 


Price 
10  Cents 


ADDRESS  CHANCtO  TO 

7 EAST  16th  STHSE 

IS  E W YC3  K 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016 


https://archive.org/details/indiasfreedominaOOfrie 


FOREWORD 


The  cases  which  are  presented  below  are  those  of  young  Hindus  engaged  in 
the  effort  to  secure  the  independence  of  their  native  land.  Whether  we  believe 
that  the  rule  of  England  in  India  is  wise  and  beneficent,  or,  in  spite  of  abuses, 
to  be  preferred  to  any  alternative,  or  whether  we  agree  with  Bernard  Shaw 
that  no  nation  is  fit  to  rule  another,  in  any  case  we  owe  respect  and  sympathy 
to  these  idealists.  They  represent  the  hope  and  aspiration  which  is  the  first 
claim  any  people  can  make  for  freedom,  the  first  sign  that  it  deserves  it.  Driven 
from  India,  they  have  come  to  our  shores,  drawn  by  the  traditional  sympathy  of 
this  country  with  ideals  of  political  independence,  confiding  in  the  hospitality 
toward  the  oppressed  of  other  lands  which  has  been  a noble  chapter  in  our  history. 

For  the  most  part  they  seek  to  put  the  cause  of  India  before  the  world  by 
peaceful  discussion  so  that  the  circumstances  and  results  of  British  rule  may 
be  a matter  of  general  information — and  in  the  spirit  of  the  new  world  of  inter- 
national partnership  to  which  we  look  forward,  no  such  demand  can  be  repressed. 

In  some  cases  they  have  been  convicted  of  violating  our  neutrality  laws,  and 
are  suffering  the  penalties  therefor.  In  these  cases  it  behooves  us  to  take 
care  that  once  the  crime  against  this  country  is  expiated,  we  do  not,  by  deporting 
the  offenders  into  the  hands  of  the  British  authorities,  make  ourselves  the  agents 
of  punishment  for  a foreign  power  for  offences  which  are  no  concern  of  our  own. 
It  is  particularly  important  that  we  do  not  turn  these  men  over  to  a government 
from  whom  they  have  fled  and  by  whom  they  will  be  executed. 

This  country  has  always  jealously  preserved  the  right  of  asylum  for  those 
of  other  countries  who  considered  themselves  oppressed.  Recently  we  gave 
full  protection  to  the  Cuban  revolutionists,  who  prepared  within  our  borders 
for  armed  insurrection  against  Spain.  Today  we  allow  English  rule  in  Ireland 
to  be  freely  and  publicly  challenged.  Because  the  Hindus  are  few  in  number 
and  weak  in  resources  is  no  reason  why  they  should  be  deprived  of  the  historic 
right  to  appeal  to  public  opinion  in  the  United  States,  and  from  the  United  States 
to  the  world,  in  the  question  of  the  independence  of  their  native  land. 


' 


India’s  Freedom  in  American  Courts 


The  Hindu  activity  in  the  United  States  is  obviously  and  frankly 
a case  of  insurgency  concerning  a foreign  government — Great  Britain — 
and  was  never  intended  to  interfere  with  the  laws  or  peace  of  the 
United  States.  The  activities  which  have  led  to  the  indictment  of  vari- 
ous Hindus  in  this  country,  have  their  roots  16,000  miles  away,  in 
India,  where  315,000,000  souls  are  living  in  a state  of  economic  and 
political  subjection  to  Great  Britain. 

The  injustices  which  the  Indian  people  endure  have  driven  a large 
number  of  awakened  Hindus  into  opposition  to  their  rulers.  Hindu 
activity  in  the  United  States  is  but  a phase  of  the  Indian  movement 
which  aims  to  gain  independence  for  India;  and  whatever  violation  of 
the  United  States  law  has  occurred  as  a result  of  such  activity,  was 
unintended  and  resulted  from  the  attempt  of  Hindus  to  conduct  educa- 
tional propaganda  in  behalf  of  their  people,  regarded  by  them,  and 
also  by  British  and  American  authorities,  as  oppressed.  Their  efforts, 
started  long  before  America  entered  the  war,  continued  during  the  war, 
and  led  to  their  arrest. 

The  case  now  pending  concerns  the  following  persons: 

1.  Sailendranath  Ghose,  a young  graduate  of  Calcutta 
University,  who  came  to  the  United  States  two  years 
ago. 

2.  Taraknath  Das,  a naturalized  American  citizen,  a 
graduate  and  Fellow  of  the  University  of  Washington, 
a lecturer  and  author.  Mr.  Das  is  now  serving 
twenty-two  months’  prison  term  at  Leavenworth, 
Kansas,  prison  for  complicity  in  the  California  con- 
spiracy to  violate  neutrality  laws,  in  1915,  before 
America  entered  the  war. 

3.  Bhagwan  Singh,  a lecturer  and  poet,  who  is  now  serv- 
ing an  eighteen-month  term  at  McNeil  Island,  Wash- 
ington, for  the  same  offense  as  Mr.  Das.  Mr.  Singh  is 
not  an  American  citizen. 

4.  Agnes  Smedley,  a young  American  woman,  student  at 
New  York  University  at  the  time  of  her  arrest,  for- 
merly a teacher  in  California. 

5 


5.  Mr.  and  Mrs.  W.  A.  Wotherspoon,  of  San  Francisco; 
Americans  and  friends  of  the  Hindus.  Mr.  Wother- 
spoon is  a retired  attorney. 

6.  Bluma  Kraus,  of  San  Francisco,  a young  Russian  girl; 
friend  of  the  Hindus.  Miss  Kraus,  along  with  Mr. 
and  Mrs.  Wotherspoon,  seems  to  be  held  because 
she  befriended  the  Hindus  and  gave  them  letters  of 
introduction  to  her  friends. 

Mr.  Ghose  and  Miss  Smedley  were  arrested  in  New  York  on 
March  16,  1918,  the  other  defendants  being  apprehended  in  San  Fran- 
cisco. Both  Miss  Smedley  and  Mr.  Ghose  were  given  the  “third 
degree,”  imprisoned,  and  their  respective  places  of  abode  raided 
without  legal  warrant  of  any  kind.  They,  along  with  the  other  defend- 
ants, were  first  indicted  in  New  York  for  violation  of  Sections  1 and 
2 of  the  Espionage  Act.  Later  they  were  indicted  by  the  Grand  Jury  of 
the  Southern  Division  of  the  United  States  District  Court  for  the 
Northern  District  of  California  (San  Francisco),  for  the  violation  of 
Sections  2 and  3 of  Title  8,  and  Section  3 of  Title  1 of  the  Espionage 
Act,  approved  by  Congress,  June  15,  1917. 

The  main  charge  in  the  case  is  that  the  defendants  falsely  acted  as 
representatives  of  a “foreign  government”  (meaning  the  Indian  Nation- 
alist Party,  a political  body  in  India),  without  prior  notification  to 
the  Secretary  of  State;  that,  in  such  capacity,  they  wrote  letters  to  the 
Secretary  of  State  of  the  United  State  and  to  foreign  allied  and  neutral 
ambassadors  from  Denmark,  Brazil,  Sweden,  Japan,  the  Netherlands, 
and  to  Leon  Trotzky,  of  the  Russian  Socialist  Federated  Soviet  Repub- 
lic, asking  that  India’s  right  to  freedom  be  considered,  and  giving 
reasons  why  this  should  be  granted. 

Copies  of  the  letters  to  the  Secretary  of  State  and  to  the  foreign 
ambassadors  were  sent  to  hundreds  of  newspapers  throughout  the  coun- 
try. In  part,  they  read  as  follows: 

“We  rejoice  that  the  government  of  your  own  country  stands  for 
peace  wTith  dignity  and  justice.  True  and  lasting  peace  means  the 
removal  of  the  causes  of  war.  The  causes  of  W'ar,  whether  political  or 
economic,  can  never  be  removed  unless  and  until  the  nations  of  the 
world,  great  or  small,  are  free  and  independent  to  shape  their  own 
destiny.  In  view  of  this,  complete  freedom  and  independence  of  India 
. . . is  essential. 

“Imperialism,  which  inevitably  leads  to  aggression,  is  the  root  cause 
of  wrar.  British  imperialism  insists  upon  keeping  the  millions  of  India 
in  subjection,  violating  the  principles  of  equity,  justice  and  humanity. 
Under  the  present  system  of  alien  rule,  enforced  upon  the  people  against 
their  will  and  consent,  it  is  impossible  to  have  ‘liberty,  self-government, 

6 


and  undictated  development’  of  the  people  of  India.  So  the  Indian 
Nationalist  Party  earnestly  seeks  your  co-operation  in  bringing  about 
an  Independent  India.  . . . 

“Free  India  means  freedom  for  the  people  of  Hindustan,  crushed 
and  pilloried  for  generations  by  the  tyrannical  and  piratical  acts  of  an 
alien  people.  Free  India  means  free  China,  free  Persia,  nay  free  Asia. 
And  if  Asia  is  to  unite  with  Europe  to  co-operate  in  furthering  the 
cause  of  humanity,  she  must  meet  her  on  equal  terms — she  must  first 
he  free  and  independent. 

“On  behalf  of  the  three  hundred  and  fifteen  million  people  of 
India,  the  Indian  Nationalist  Party  brings  this  message  to  you.  We 
put  this  message  before  you  with  a feeling  of  justice.  In  the  name 
of  Justice  and  Humanity  we  beg  of  you  your  proper  attention  to  this 
great  problem  of  India, — for  the  problem  of  India  is  the  problem  of 
the  world  which  awaits  your  careful  consideration.  The  solution  of 
this  world  problem  demands  the  complete  independence  of  India,  and 
the  Indian  Nationalist  Party  earnestly  seeks  the  co-operation  of  your 
Government  in  bringing  about  this  supreme  end.” 

A second  charge  is  that  the  defendants  published  a book  entitled 
“ Isolation  of  Japan  in  World  Politics by  an  Asiatic  statesman,  which, 
it  is  alleged,  “contains  false  statements  and  reports.”  The  book  deals 
with  world  politics  and  states,  among  other  things,  that  Japan’s  duty  is  to 
repudiate  the  Anglo- Japanese  Alliance  in  case  of  a revolution  in  India, 
and  to  give  aid  to  the  Indian  revolutionists.  The  introduction  to  the 
book  is  by  Hon.  Hasayoshi  Oshikawa,  M.  P.,  of  the  Imperial  Japanese 
Diet,  and  the  appendices  by  Dr.  Setsusi  Miyake,  editor  of  The  Nippon 
yobi  Nihhonjin,  of  Tokio,  and  Prof.  Dr.  Senga  Tsurutaro  of  Kyoto 
Imperial  University.  It  was  originally  published  in  Japanese,  but  was 
later  translated  into  English,  and  published  by  Miss  Smedley  in  New 
York.  No  copies  had  been  distributed,  and  all  were  in  a store-house. 

Mr.  Ghose  was  held  in  the  Tombs  Prison,  New  York,  for  nine 
months,  in  $25,000  bail.  Miss  Smedley  was  held  for  eight  weeks,  after 
which  her  bail,  $10,000,  was  furnished.  Mr.  Das  and  Mr.  Singh  were 
in  prison,  and  the  other  defendants  were  released  in  $1,000  bail  each 
in  San  Francisco. 

In  November,  1918,  proceedings  were  instituted  by  San  Francisco 
for  the  removal  of  the  defendants  to  that  city  for  trial.  A motion 
against  removal  was  made  and  appealed  to  the  Supreme  Court.  The 
appeal  is  still  pending  at  this  time — April,  1919. 

In  November,  Mr.  Gilbert  E.  Roe,  counsel,  and  Charles  Recht, 
attorney  for  the  defense,  succeeded  in  causing  the  New  York  indict- 
ments to  be  dismissed,  and  in  December  Mr.  Ghose  was  released  in 


7 


$6,000  bail.  The  court  also  sustained  the  motion  of  the  attorneys  for  the 
defense  for  the  return  of  all  books,  papers  and  personal  properties  of 
both  Miss  Smedley  and  Mr.  Ghose,  which  had  been  illegally  seized.  A 
few  of  the  books  and  a few  of  their  personal  properties  were  returned, 
but  the  order  of  the  Court  was  never  complied  with  in  full. 


THE  NEW  CASE  AGAINST  MR.  DAS. 

On  December  3,  1918,  the  San  Francisco  District  Attorney,  not 
content  with  the  imprisonment  and  continued  prosecution  of  the  Hin- 
dus, brought  proceedings  against  Mr.  Das  to  revoke  his  citizenship, 
acquired  by  naturalization  a few  years  ago.  Confined  as  Mr.  Das  is,  in 
prison,  it  is  impossible  for  him  to  arrange  for  his  own  defense  or  to  be 
present  at  his  trial.  The  proceedings  were  brought  against  him  in  San 
Francisco,  instead  of  in  Leavenworth,  evidently  because  the  authorities 
thought  they  could  secure  his  conviction  by  taking  advantage  of  the 
anti-Asiatic  feeling  in  California,  as  well  as  of  the  prejudice  aroused 
against  the  Hindus  by  the  recent  Hindu  trial.  Mr.  Das’s  imprisonment 
also  makes  it  much  easier  to  deprive  him  of  citizenship.  Mr.  S.  G. 
Pandit,  attorney-at-law,  of  Los  Angeles,  has  been  retained  to  represent 
Mr.  Das  in  court. 

It  is  believed  by  the  Hindus  concerned,  and  by  Americans  who 
know  of  the  case,  that  this  is  merely  a preliminary  to  the  intended 
deportation  of  Mr.  Das,  and  it  is  practically  a certainty  that  similar 
action  is  to  be  taken  toward  other  Hindus. 

This  belief  is  justified  by  the  case  of  Gopal  Singh,  a brief  state- 
ment of  which  is  appended  to  this  document. 

Deportation  for  a Hindu  does  not  mean  what  it  does  to  a Euro- 
pean, who  is  returned  to  the  land  of  his  nativity.  Often  the  European 
is  glad  to  be  deported.  Deportation  for  a Hindu  Nationalist,  however, 
means  one  of  two  things:  Imprisonment  for  life,  or  execution — gener- 
ally execution — at  the  hands  of  the  British  authorities  in  India. 

There  are  no  cases  so  patently  and  obviously  war  cases  as  those 
of  the  Hindus.  Though  the  charge  is  one  based  upon  the  violation  of 
an  American  statute — the  Espionage  Act — there  is  every  reason  to 
believe  that  the  real  power  behind  it  is  the  British  Government.  The 
British  Government,  for  instance,  took  an  active  part  in  compiling  the 
case  against  the  Hindus  in  San  Francisco  in  1917-1918,  and  it  brought 
Indian  witnesses  under  military  guard  all  the  way  from  India,  Siam 
and  Shanghai,  to  testify  in  American  courts  against  their  countrymen. 


8 


When  the  case  was  finished,  the  San  Francisco  Chronicle  announced  that 
the  British  Government  had  spent  $2, 500, 000  to  secure  the  conviction 
of  the  sixteen  Hindu  Nationalists  on  trial.  Mr.  George  Denham,  of  the 
Criminal  Investigation  Department  in  India,  a British  secret  service 
officer  in  San  Francisco  throughout  the  trial,  helped  compile  the  case 
and  helped  direct  the  prosecution. 

The  hands  of  British  secret  police  were  also  seen  in  the  case  in 
New  York,  one  of  them,  a Mr.  Nathan,  being  one  of  the  inquisitors  of 
the  defendants,  even  going  so  far  as  to  coerce  American  citizens  in 
an  attempt  to  secure  witnesses  against  the  defendants  when  they  came 
to  trial,  and  in  an  effort  to  learn  their  attitude  toward,  and  loyalty  to, 
the  British  Empire. 

These  cases  appeal  peculiarly  to  thoughtful  people.  They  put 
America  in  the  position  of  either  maintaining  or  surrendering  her 
hitherto  unviolated  tradition  of  political  asylum.  Various  magazines 
have  called  attention  to  this  fact;  the  New  Republic,  in  an  editorial 
(February  15),  warned  our  government  against  becoming  an  “accom- 
plice of  foreign  tyrants”  in  the  matter  of  deportation. 

Political  refugees  from  many  lands,  among  them  Puren,  Rudo- 
vich  and  Kossuth,  have  sought  refuge  in  America  and,  from  these 
shores,  “have  thrown  the  torch  of  revolution”  into  their  oppressed 
countries.  In  America  they  have  found  moral  and  financial  support 
for  their  cause,  and  none  of  them  was  prosecuted  for  the  violation 
of  neutrality.  Powerful  individuals  and  organizations  have  protected 
their  interests  and  have  seen  to  it  that  they  were  not  treated  unjustly. 

The  Hindus,  on  the  other  hand,  are  few  in  number,  with  little 
American  support,  with  few  men  of  prominence  or  power  here,  and 
such  friends  and  sympathizers  as  they  might  have  had,  even  among 
their  own  people,  have  felt  that  they  could  not  jeapordize  their  own 
safety  by  defending  or  befriending  them. 

Quite  recently,  however,  a few  Americans  have  taken  an  interest 
in  the  cases.  Some  have  sympathized  with  the  cause  of  Hindu  freedom, 
others  have  thought  that  at  least  every  man  has  a right  to  a fair  trial. 
An  appeal  for  defense  funds  was  first  sent  out  by  a committee  com- 
posed of  Leonard  D.  Abbott,  Margaret  Sanger,  M.  E.  Fitzgerald  and 
Norman  Thomas.  More  recently  still  another  “Appeal  to  Americans” 
appeared  in  the  Dial  magazine  of  February  22d,  signed  by  John  Dewey, 
Frank  P.  Walsh,  Paul  Kennaday,  Clarence  Darrow,  George  W.  Nasmyth, 
William  English  Walling,  Charles  Edward  Russell,  Mrs.  Ernest  Poole, 
Mrs.  Mary  K.  Simkhovitch,  Robert  Morss  Lovett,  Charles  Ferguson, 
Mrs.  Robert  Bruere,  Miss  S.  P.  Breckinridge  and  Albert  De  Silver. 
These  appeals  take  the  stand  that  every  man  has  a right  to  a fair 
trial  and  that  he  should  not  be  railroaded  to  prison  for  lack  of  an 

9 


adequate  defense;  that  America  should  continue  to  grant  refuge  to 
those  who  have  sacrificed  themselves  for  liberty,  and  that  the  continued 
prosecution  of  Hindus,  who  are  working  for  the  freedom  of  their  coun- 
try, should  cease.  Also  that  these  men  should  not  be  turned  over  to 
their  executioners,  and  that  they  should  not  be  prosecuted  under  stat- 
utes which  were  intended  only  to  protect  this  country  during  a state 
of  war. 


Gopal  Singh  Faces  Deportation 

Gopal  Singh,  a young  Hindu  revolutionist,  was  convicted  in  San 
Francisco  in  April,  1918,  for  violation  of  our  neutrality  laws.  He  was 
one  of  the  men  on  whom  the  British  Government  spent  $2,500,000  to 
secure  conviction  in  American  courts.  He  was  sentenced  to  one  year 
and  one  day  at  McNeil  Island  Prison,  state  of  Washington.  On  Feb- 
ruary 10th,  thirteen  days  before  the  expiration  of  his  sentence,  he 
was  notified  that  he  was  to  be  arrested  on  February  23rd,  for  deporta- 
tion, despite  the  fact  that  his  original  sentence  had  not  imposed  deporta- 
tion upon  him. 

He  was  subsequently  arrested  for  deportation  and  held  for  viola- 
tion of  the  Immigration  Act  of  February  5,  1917.  The  particular 
charge  read  that  he  had  been  sentenced,  “subsequent  to  the  passage  of 
said  Act,  to  imprisonment  for  a term  of  one  year  or  more  because  of 
conviction  in  this  country  of  a crime  involving  moral  turpitude  com- 
mitted within  five  years  after  his  entry  into  the  United  States.”  And, 
that  he  was  “a  person  likely  to  become  a public  charge  at  the  time  of 
his  entry.” 

Gopal  Singh’s  case  was  purely  political;  his  sole  interest  was  in 
propaganda  for  the  freedom  of  his  own  native  land.  He  had  taken 
no  part  in  political,  social  or  economic  unrest  in  America.  In  fact, 
the  code  of  honor  of  Hindu  Nationalists  does  not  permit  them  to  criti- 
cize the  institutions  of  countries  in  which  they  take  refuge.  If  America 
had  had  any  interest  in  this  deportation  proceeding,  Gopal  Singh’s 
original  sentence  would  have  included  it. 

The  deportation  of  this  young  man  to  India  will  mean  his  death. 
For  a Hindu,  who  has  worked  for  the  freedom  of  his  country,  there  is 
but  one  alternative  to  death  and  that  seldom  used,  and  that  is  imprison- 
ment for  life. 

Gopal  Singh  has  served  his  sentence  for  violation  of  our  laws. 
He  has  been  punished,  and  justice  would  decree  that  a man  should  not 
be  punished  twice  for  the  same  act.  Deportation  for  him  or  for  any 
other  Hindu,  will  mean  that  we  in  America  seek  not  alone  justice,  but 
vengeance;  either  that,  or  that  we  are  submissive  tools  of  a foreign 
government  which  seeks  to  keep  us  ignorant  of  the  truth  about  India, 

10 


and  at  the  same  time  claims  as  its  victims  men  who  seek  to  enlighten 
us,  to  secure  our  active  sympathy  and  support,  and  to  free  their  native 
land  from  an  alien  rule. 

If  Gopal  Singh  is  deported,  other  Hindus  will  follow:  Santok 
Singh  now  in  McNeil  Island  Prison  who  will  finish  his  term  in  June; 
Bhagwan  Singh,  in  the  same  prison,  who  will  finish  his  sentence  in 
August;  Taraknath  Das,  in  Leavenworth,  if  his  citizenship  is  revoked; 
and  other  Hindus  as  yet  unconvicted. 

American  historic  tradition  of  granting  refuge  to  political  refugees 
is  threatened.  We  have  laws  to  punish  offenders  who  violate  our  laws. 
If  we  turn  Hindu  political  prisoners  over  to  the  foreign  rulers  of  their 
land,  from  whom  they  have  fled  to  our  shores,  we  are  not  only  guilty 
of  sending  men  to  their  death,  but  we  are  sending  to  death  our  own 
proudest  of  traditions  and  most  idealistic  principle — that  of  granting 
refuge  to  the  oppressed  of  other  lands. 

WHAT  YOU  CAN  DO. 

If  you  sympathize  with  the  cause  for  which  these  young  Indians 
have  sacrificed  themselves — for  the  freedom  of  India — or  if  you  merely 
believe  that  they  have  a right  to  an  adequate  defense  and  to  asylum, 
your  financial  help  is  requested,  and  will  be  gratefully  received.  Most 
of  all,  if  you  wish  to  protest  against  the  act  of  hurling  them  into  the 
arms  of  their  executioners,  your  help  is  urged. 

Write  letters  to  Secretary  Wilson  of  the  Department  of  Labor,  pro- 
testing against  this  action.  Demand  that  Gopal  Singh  and  other  Hindus 
he  permitted  to  remain  in  America  after  they  finish  their  prison  terms 
and  that  further  prosecution  of  them  cease.  Support  the  Friends  of 
Freedom  for  India,  an  organization  whose  purpose  is  to  protect  the 
Hindus  from  such  acts  of  injustice  as  this. 

Checks  and  money  orders  should  be  sent  to,  Treasurer 

FRIENDS  OF  FREEDOM  FOR  INDIA, 

92  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York 


11 


THE  ACID  TEST 

The  acid  test  is  being  applied  to  American  idealism. 

This  acid  test  is  the  case  of  the  Hindu  refugees  and  political  prisoners  now 
in  America  who,  unlike  the  Irish  or  Russians,  are  few  in  number,  poor 
in  financial  resources,  and  without  political  backing. 

For  a number  of  years  Hindus,  who  have  worked  for  the  independence  of 
India  from  British  rule,  have  been  forced  to  seek  refuge  in  other 
countries.  Many  of  them  have  come  to  America.  Here  they  have 
attempted,  as  have  revolutionists  from  other  countries,  to  carry  on 
their  propaganda. 

Some  nineteen  Hindus  were  convicted  in  1918,  for  violation  of  neutrality 
laws  in  1915,  before  America  entered  the  war.  Some  of  these  men, 
after  finishing  their  prison  terms,  are  now  facing  deportation.  One  is 
held  in  Seattle,  Washington,  for  this  purpose. 

Other  Hindus  were  arrested  in  1918  for  carrying  on  propaganda  in  behalf 
of  the  freedom  of  India.  These  men  are  now  awaiting  trial  for  alleged 
violation  of  the  Espionage  Act. 

This  means  that  America  is  violating  her  proudest  tradition,  that  of 
granting  refuge  to  the  oppressed  of  other  lands;  that  America  is  will- 
ing to  hurl  back  into  the  arms  of  their  executioners  men  w'ho  have 
sacrificed  themselves  for  liberty;  men  who  “represent  the  hope  and 
aspiration  which  is  the  first  claim  any  people  can  make  for  freedom.” 

To  protect  the  Hindus  who  are  in  trouble  because  of  their  activities  in 
behalf  of  the  freedom  of  India,  and  to  keep  Americans  in  touch  with 
the  problems  of  India,  a number  of  men  and  women  have  organized  a 
Friends  of  Freedom  for  India. 

The  Friends  of  Freedom  for  India  aims  (1)  to  maintain  the  right  of 
political  asylum  and  to  see  that  Hindu  political  prisoners  and  refugees 
get  justice  in  the  light  of  American  traditions; 

(2)  to  assist  in  fair,  frank  and  open  discussion  that  the  truth  about 
India  may  be  ascertained. 

It  is  the  work  of  this  organization  to  furnish  legal  assistance  to  these 
Hindus,  to  hold  occasional  meetings,  to  publish  tracts  about  the  cases 
and  about  conditions  in  India,  and  to  furnish  other  aid  when  necessary 
and  when  possible. 

We  need  your  moral  and  financial  support.  Help  us  withstand  the  acid  test. 

FRIENDS  OF  FREEDOM  FOR  INDIA 
92  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York 

Robert  Morss  Lovett,  Temporary  President 

Frank  P.  Walsh,  Vice  President  Agnes  Smedley,  Secretary 

Dudley  Field  Malone,  Vice  President  Louis  P.  Lochner,  Treasurer 

Checks  should  be  made  payable  to  the  treasurer. 


I hereby  pledge  to  the  Friends  of  Freedom  for  India  a monthly  (quar- 
terly) contribution  of  $ to  be  used  to  promote  the 

objects  of  the  organization. 

Signed 


Date. 


Address. 


